Kathleen Kanev vs Noemi Basiletti Head-to-Head Stats, Results & Performance Comparison
By Wojtek Kolan
Form
L W L W W L W L W L
Form
W W L W L W L L L LH2H: Kanev 1 - 0 Basiletti
They have played 2 sets in total, with Kanev winning 2 and Basiletti winning 0. The last match between Kanev and Basiletti was at the W15 Sharm ElSheikh, 19-02-2025, First, Hard with Kathleen Kanev getting the victory 6-4 6-4.
| Players | Head-To-Head Match Wins |
|---|---|
| Kathleen Kanev | 1 |
| Noemi Basiletti | 0 |
W15 Sharm ElSheikh(19-02-2025)
6
4
6
4
Today’s Tennis Tips:
Gauff VS Linette PREDICTION Hard
Miami Open - Miami wta
24 Mar 2025 / Fourth
ODDS
PREDICTION
EDGE
Dimitrov VS Nakashima PREDICTION Hard
Miami Open - Miami atp
25 Mar 2025 / Fourth
ODDS
PREDICTION
EDGE
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6-4 6-4 |
Stats 
Kathleen Kanev
Player
Noemi Basiletti
76%
(
45 of
59)
1st Serve %
74%
(
55 of
74)
0
Aces
0
4
Double Faults
2
64%
(
29 of
45)
1st Serve Won
55%
(
30 of
55)
50%
(
7 of
14)
2nd Serve Won
32%
(
6 of
19)
45%
(
5 of
11)
Break Points Won
43%
(
3 of
7)
39%
(
23 of
59)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
38 of
74)
74
Total Points Won
59
|
||||
Stats
1
H2H Matches
0
2
Sets Won
0
12
Games Won
8
0
Aces (Total)
0
4
Total Double Faults
2
1:29:43
Average Match Time
1:29:43
76% (45/59)
1st Serve %
74% (55/74)
64% (29/45)
1st Serve Win %
55% (30/55)
50% (7/14)
2nd Serve Win %
32% (6/19)
45% (5/11)
Break Points Won % (Total)
43% (3/7)
51% (38/74)
Return Points Win %
39% (23/59)
100% (1/1)
Best of 3 Sets Win %
0% (0/1)
0% (0/0)
Best of 5 Sets Win %
0% (0/0)
0% (0/0)
Tiebreaks Win % (Total)
0% (0/0)
0% (0/0)
Deciding Set Win %
0% (0/0)
100% (1/1)
1st Set Won, Won Match
0% (0/0)
0% (1/0)
1st Set Won, Lost Match
0% (0/0)
0% (0/0)
1st Set Lost, Won Match
0% (1/0)
Currently displayed stats includes matches of all levels. To exclude lower level events (as per ATP / WTA official stats) toggle button in page footer.
Kathleen Kanev vs Noemi Basiletti Important H2H Prediction Stats:
Head-to-head: Kathleen Kanev 1 - 0 Noemi Basiletti
- Recent Form Analysis: In the past six months, the serving prowess of Kanev has been noteworthy, with a second serve winning percentage of 42.58%. Basiletti, on the other hand, has exhibited a slightly lower success rate of 42.07% in this aspect. It is worth noting that there exists a significant correlation between this statistical measure and the accuracy of match predictions.
- Return Game Proficiency: Analyzing the return game statistics of the players in recent form, Kanev has impressively won 63.86% of their opponent's second serve points. Basiletti, although slightly behind, has a commendable success rate of 55.11%. Similar statistics for first serve returns stand at 43.41% for Kanev and 44.43% for Basiletti, respectively. These numbers hold significant weight in determining the favored competitor in their head-to-head encounter.
- Pressure Situations: When faced with crucial moments, Kanev has displayed remarkable composure by saving 57.8% of breakpoints in recent form. Comparatively, Basiletti has managed to save 49.07% of such critical points. These statistics hold valuable insights for predictions related to in-game betting.
- Performance Overview: Over the course of the past year, Kanev has maintained a balanced record, securing victory in 50% of matches played (W/L: 21/21). Meanwhile, Basiletti has demonstrated a slightly better performance, winning 52.38% of matches (W/L: 11/10). This overview provides a comprehensive perspective for predicting their head-to-head encounter.
- Surface Proficiency: Notably, Kanev boasts a remarkable career win percentage of 60% on Hard surfaces (W/L: 78/53), constituting their most successful terrain. Conversely, their performance on Clay has been comparatively weaker, with a win percentage of 44% (W/L: 35/45). In contrast, Basiletti's best career win percentage of 67% (W/L: 2/1) is achieved on Indoor Hard courts, while their least successful surface is Clay, with a win percentage of 33% (W/L: 3/6).
- Player Level: Evaluating the competition levels of the players in the last year, Kanev has predominantly participated in the Challengers/ITF tournaments with purses exceeding $10,000. Within this context, they have managed to secure victory in 40.91% of matches (W/L: 9/13). In comparison, Basiletti has primarily competed in the same category of tournaments, winning 56.25% of matches (W/L: 9/7). Considering these divergent levels of competition, it becomes imperative to interpret player statistics relative to the event level.
- Opponent Quality: Over the span of the past 12 months, Kanev has faced opponents with an average rank of 310.26, highlighting their encounters against relatively stronger players. Conversely, Basiletti has primarily encountered opponents with an average rank of 420, reflecting slightly lower-ranked adversaries.
- Deciding Set Ability: For spectators interested in live predictions and betting, the outcome of a match's deciding set holds particular significance. In the last year, Kanev has impressively emerged victorious in 42% of deciding sets, showcasing their ability to thrive under intense pressure. Basiletti, while slightly behind, has achieved success in 38% of their matches played on the tour in such decisive situations.
- Current Event H2H Stats: While historical performance serves as a valuable predictor, it is crucial to incorporate current event statistics to gauge the form of the respective players. For this purpose, referring to the section below (if players have participated in the ongoing event) is highly recommended. Additionally, considering the players' performances at specific events can provide further insight when making predictions.
- Break Point Conversion: In recent matches, Kanev has effectively converted 50.37% of their breakpoint opportunities, while Basiletti has demonstrated a similar proficiency of 50.59% in terms of seizing their chances to break their opponents' serve. These numbers serve as crucial indicators for in-game live betting tips when either player finds themselves in a position to secure a break.
- If you possess an interest in models that excel in predicting tennis matches, this article serves as an excellent starting point. Take note that its contents are tailored for enthusiasts of statistical analysis.
Kathleen Kanev Recent Matches Played
Before:
| OPPONENT | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2 |
Stats
Gaia Squarcialupi
Player
Kathleen Kanev
56%
(
25 of
45)
1st Serve %
83%
(
50 of
60)
2
Aces
0
2
Double Faults
3
80%
(
20 of
25)
1st Serve Won
48%
(
24 of
50)
50%
(
10 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
40%
(
4 of
10)
50%
(
5 of
10)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
33%
(
15 of
45)
Rtn Points Won
53%
(
32 of
60)
62
Total Points Won
43
|
6-2 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Kathleen Kanev
Player
Noemi Basiletti
76%
(
45 of
59)
1st Serve %
74%
(
55 of
74)
0
Aces
0
4
Double Faults
2
64%
(
29 of
45)
1st Serve Won
55%
(
30 of
55)
50%
(
7 of
14)
2nd Serve Won
32%
(
6 of
19)
45%
(
5 of
11)
Break Points Won
43%
(
3 of
7)
39%
(
23 of
59)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
38 of
74)
74
Total Points Won
59
|
6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Daria Zelinskaya
Player
Kathleen Kanev
63%
(
59 of
93)
1st Serve %
76%
(
69 of
91)
3
Aces
0
2
Double Faults
4
54%
(
32 of
59)
1st Serve Won
62%
(
43 of
69)
44%
(
15 of
34)
2nd Serve Won
27%
(
6 of
22)
33%
(
4 of
12)
Break Points Won
46%
(
6 of
13)
49%
(
46 of
93)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
42 of
91)
89
Total Points Won
95
|
7-6(5) 1-6 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Kathleen Kanev
Player
Kateryna Lazarenko
80%
(
36 of
45)
1st Serve %
63%
(
26 of
41)
0
Aces
1
0
Double Faults
4
67%
(
24 of
36)
1st Serve Won
46%
(
12 of
26)
67%
(
6 of
9)
2nd Serve Won
33%
(
5 of
15)
63%
(
5 of
8)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
33%
(
15 of
45)
Rtn Points Won
59%
(
24 of
41)
54
Total Points Won
32
|
6-2 6-1 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Emily Webley-Smith
Player
Kathleen Kanev
61%
(
51 of
84)
1st Serve %
60%
(
55 of
91)
7
Aces
0
6
Double Faults
7
69%
(
35 of
51)
1st Serve Won
62%
(
34 of
55)
27%
(
9 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
33%
(
12 of
36)
46%
(
6 of
13)
Break Points Won
50%
(
5 of
10)
48%
(
40 of
84)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
45 of
91)
89
Total Points Won
86
|
7-6(4) 7-5 | H2H | ||
| QF | w/o | H2H | |||
| R2 |
Stats
Kathleen Kanev
Player
Giulia Alessia Monteleone
84%
(
36 of
43)
1st Serve %
51%
(
19 of
37)
0
Aces
0
0
Double Faults
5
67%
(
24 of
36)
1st Serve Won
37%
(
7 of
19)
71%
(
5 of
7)
2nd Serve Won
11%
(
2 of
18)
75%
(
6 of
8)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
33%
(
14 of
43)
Rtn Points Won
76%
(
28 of
37)
57
Total Points Won
23
|
6-0 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Kathleen Kanev
Player
Maria Fernanda Morales
77%
(
30 of
39)
1st Serve %
63%
(
25 of
40)
0
Aces
0
0
Double Faults
1
80%
(
24 of
30)
1st Serve Won
44%
(
11 of
25)
67%
(
6 of
9)
2nd Serve Won
27%
(
4 of
15)
56%
(
5 of
9)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
23%
(
9 of
39)
Rtn Points Won
63%
(
25 of
40)
55
Total Points Won
24
|
6-0 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Clervie Ngounoue
Player
Kathleen Kanev
69%
(
54 of
78)
1st Serve %
72%
(
60 of
83)
4
Aces
1
4
Double Faults
2
76%
(
41 of
54)
1st Serve Won
55%
(
33 of
60)
42%
(
10 of
24)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
12 of
23)
45%
(
5 of
11)
Break Points Won
33%
(
3 of
9)
35%
(
27 of
78)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
38 of
83)
89
Total Points Won
72
|
6-2 4-6 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Kathleen Kanev
Player
Yolande Leacock
74%
(
29 of
39)
1st Serve %
55%
(
21 of
38)
1
Aces
0
2
Double Faults
1
76%
(
22 of
29)
1st Serve Won
33%
(
7 of
21)
40%
(
4 of
10)
2nd Serve Won
29%
(
5 of
17)
86%
(
6 of
7)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
33%
(
13 of
39)
Rtn Points Won
68%
(
26 of
38)
52
Total Points Won
25
|
6-1 6-1 | H2H | ||
view more
Noemi Basiletti Recent Matches Played
Before:
| OPPONENT | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 | 6-3 7-6(4) | H2H | |||
| R1 |
Stats
Natalija Stevanovic
Player
Noemi Basiletti
52%
(
31 of
60)
1st Serve %
78%
(
52 of
67)
1
Aces
0
4
Double Faults
0
71%
(
22 of
31)
1st Serve Won
52%
(
27 of
52)
52%
(
15 of
29)
2nd Serve Won
60%
(
9 of
15)
44%
(
4 of
9)
Break Points Won
67%
(
2 of
3)
38%
(
23 of
60)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
31 of
67)
68
Total Points Won
59
|
4-6 6-1 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Kathleen Kanev
Player
Noemi Basiletti
76%
(
45 of
59)
1st Serve %
74%
(
55 of
74)
0
Aces
0
4
Double Faults
2
64%
(
29 of
45)
1st Serve Won
55%
(
30 of
55)
50%
(
7 of
14)
2nd Serve Won
32%
(
6 of
19)
45%
(
5 of
11)
Break Points Won
43%
(
3 of
7)
39%
(
23 of
59)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
38 of
74)
74
Total Points Won
59
|
6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Anna Siskova
Player
Noemi Basiletti
70%
(
33 of
47)
1st Serve %
77%
(
40 of
52)
1
Aces
0
0
Double Faults
2
61%
(
20 of
33)
1st Serve Won
50%
(
20 of
40)
57%
(
8 of
14)
2nd Serve Won
25%
(
3 of
12)
83%
(
5 of
6)
Break Points Won
40%
(
2 of
5)
40%
(
19 of
47)
Rtn Points Won
56%
(
29 of
52)
57
Total Points Won
42
|
6-3 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 | 6-2 6-1 | H2H | |||
| R2 |
Stats
Kateryna Lazarenko
Player
Noemi Basiletti
55%
(
36 of
65)
1st Serve %
78%
(
42 of
54)
0
Aces
0
1
Double Faults
0
58%
(
21 of
36)
1st Serve Won
48%
(
20 of
42)
69%
(
20 of
29)
2nd Serve Won
58%
(
7 of
12)
40%
(
4 of
10)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
37%
(
24 of
65)
Rtn Points Won
50%
(
27 of
54)
68
Total Points Won
51
|
6-4 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Noemi Basiletti
Player
Sofia Shapatava
87%
(
33 of
38)
1st Serve %
64%
(
34 of
53)
0
Aces
1
1
Double Faults
4
70%
(
23 of
33)
1st Serve Won
65%
(
22 of
34)
40%
(
2 of
5)
2nd Serve Won
32%
(
6 of
19)
60%
(
3 of
5)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
34%
(
13 of
38)
Rtn Points Won
47%
(
25 of
53)
50
Total Points Won
41
|
6-4 4-1 ret. | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Tena Lukas
Player
Noemi Basiletti
69%
(
20 of
29)
1st Serve %
74%
(
56 of
76)
2
Aces
0
2
Double Faults
2
85%
(
17 of
20)
1st Serve Won
55%
(
31 of
56)
78%
(
7 of
9)
2nd Serve Won
40%
(
8 of
20)
21%
(
3 of
14)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
17%
(
5 of
29)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
37 of
76)
61
Total Points Won
44
|
6-4 3-0 ret. | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Noemi Basiletti
Player
Martha Matoula
77%
(
44 of
57)
1st Serve %
43%
(
22 of
51)
-
Aces
-
3
Double Faults
5
66%
(
29 of
44)
1st Serve Won
50%
(
11 of
22)
54%
(
7 of
13)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
11 of
29)
38%
(
5 of
13)
Break Points Won
20%
(
1 of
5)
37%
(
21 of
57)
Rtn Points Won
57%
(
29 of
51)
65
Total Points Won
43
|
6-2 6-1 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Noemi Basiletti
Player
Julia Peer
74%
(
32 of
43)
1st Serve %
60%
(
25 of
42)
-
Aces
-
2
Double Faults
6
63%
(
20 of
32)
1st Serve Won
40%
(
10 of
25)
73%
(
8 of
11)
2nd Serve Won
29%
(
5 of
17)
60%
(
6 of
10)
Break Points Won
20%
(
1 of
5)
35%
(
15 of
43)
Rtn Points Won
64%
(
27 of
42)
55
Total Points Won
30
|
6-0 6-2 | H2H | ||
view more
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
Stats
54% (155/132)
Win/Loss
39% (16/25)
54% (352/304)
Sets Win/Loss
42% (39/53)
52% (3135/2844)
Games Win/Loss
49% (414/435)
59% (79/54)
Hard Win/Loss
33% (7/14)
44% (35/45)
Clay Win/Loss
33% (3/6)
55% (41/33)
Indoor Hard W/L
55% (6/5)
0% (0/0)
Grass Win/Loss
0% (0/0)
0.05
Aces Per Game
0
158
Aces Total
0
0.23
Double Faults Per Game
0.16
676
Total Double Faults
67
1:22:2
Average Match Time
1:22:38
435.96
Average Opponent Rank
389.66
69% (11286/16318)
1st Serve %
76% (1683/2222)
60% (6738/11286)
1st Serve Win %
54% (913/1683)
44% (2208/5036)
2nd Serve Win %
41% (222/539)
49% (1040/2117)
Break Points Won % (Total)
49% (130/263)
47% (7658/16468)
Return Points Win %
45% (979/2155)
0% (0/0)
Slam W/L
0% (0/0)
0% (0/0)
Masters W/L
0% (0/0)
0% (0/0)
Cups W/L
0% (0/0)
50% (1/1)
Main Tour W/L
0% (0/0)
0% (0/0)
Tour Finals W/L
0% (0/0)
50% (81/81)
Challenger W/L
44% (11/14)
59% (73/50)
Futures W/L
31% (5/11)
54% (155/286)
Best of 3 Sets Win %
39% (16/41)
0% (0/0)
Best of 5 Sets Win %
0% (0/0)
41% (21/51)
Tiebreaks Win % (Total)
36% (4/11)
49% (41/83)
Deciding Set Win %
30% (3/10)
88% (153/134)
1st Set Won, Won Match
72% (18/13)
12% (153/19)
1st Set Won, Lost Match
28% (18/5)
16% (134/21)
1st Set Lost, Won Match
13% (23/3)
Other Predictions
Today's Tennis Prediction News :
- Loading news...
If you are looking to predict tennis or soccer matches, Matchstat.com has you covered! We have league, player and team stats, and specialise in detailed h2h stats between tennis players or soccer teams.
All our predictions are based on machine learning and AI. Matchstat is designed to help you in your analysis and predictions but the responsibility for your final predictions are your own.
It's good to talk... Get in touch with us [email protected]
